Am 31.10.2008 um 00:16 schrieb Kenny Tilton:
[hmmm... did you get my other response? This is a diff question, but you did not mention my other so I am concenred.]
No, I actually didn't.
Frank Goenninger wrote:... and again a question related to this: Suppose I have : (defmd kid-test-2 (family) (a-slot (c-in nil)) :kids (list (make-instance 'my-kid) (make-instance 'my-kid)))Now - this completely bypasses the control mechanism inserted into fm- kid-add - which is not what I wanted ;-)Good point, another hole. In ACL and any CL supporting a full MOP, btw, you can supply an around method to (setf slot-value-using- class) which is the implementation of (setf slot-value) and /really/ control access. Anyway...So, I am asking myself if it would be better to insert the check into the .kids observer ...One big concern I have is, is this too late? Do you have any requirement to stop these sooner? ie, If you want to signal a condition that is fine, but recovering from it means also backing out the change and /that/ would be a lot of work at the late stage when the observer gets called.
Ok. Understood. I will try the s-v-u-c approach ... Thanks! Regards, Frank
PGP.sig
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ cells-devel site list cells-devel@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/mailman/listinfo/cells-devel
